I mention mirrors only because Einstein never said that the mirror used in the round trip speed of light was not problematic, so one, in my opinion has to consider that Einstein may have had that in the back of his mind. I believe whether or not entertained by Einstein, I believe mirrors are problematic, reflection/ deflection time. Mirrors don't have to be used in my idea, but it is open to the engineering.
Doesn't seem relevant.
Why do you assume arguments not made? These are not trick questions. The questions are only for the purpose to discuss the concept of my idea to measure the one way speed of light, just the concept.
And I am responding in kind.
If you use a single clock, you cannot measure the one way speed of light. It will always be the round trip speed of light.
If you use two clocks then those clocks have to be synchronized in order to measure the one way speed of light but you cannot synchronized them without knowing the one way speed of light which is what you're trying to measure.
It has been asserted by a few on this thread that you can't use a clocks in any manner, now I know that is an overstatement but I find many objections to the use of clocks were they are not relevant. I am trying preempt those arguments by getting to what clocks are allowed and which are not allowed.
The use of clocks is not the problem, per se. No measurement of speed is possible without using some form of clock.
The issue is in either figuring out how to use one clock without ending up actually measuring the round trip speed of light or in synchronizing two clocks without knowing the one way speed of light. Either way you go, the result is the same, there is no known way to measure the one way speed of light.
Also, there was more than once when you directly stated that there was no need for a clock at all. Each time you did so, you contradicted yourself. You either used a clock and weren't realizing it or you weren't measuring speed. Either way, it was a contradiction. Any perception on your part of our objection to the use of clocks is generated by this line of reasoning. It isn't the use of clocks we object too. It's your implied attempt to both have and not have a clock involved in the measurement.
Example: In my model/idea you have to know the distance at the time of the test of the targets. I am not asking if that is possible and please don't tell me it is or it isn't possible, that is an engineering problem, the only question I asking is the clock used in a device to measure the distance and just the clock, is that clock objected to.
There's more than one problem with this question. First of all, clocks do not measure distance. If you are using a clock to measure distance what you are doing is measuring the time it takes for something to travel between to points. That works great if whatever is doing the traveling is going at a known speed but that is exactly what is not known here. The question being asked is "Does light travel at the same speed in all directions?" or "What is the one way speed of light?" if the answer to that question is not known then any use of a clock begs the question[sup*[/sup] (i.e. it presumes the answer to the question at hand).
Also, another valid response to your question is, "Which clock are you talking about?"
If there's only one then how are you not measuring the round trip speed of light?
If there are two clocks then which one are you asking about?
If you say they are the same, then how do you know that they're the same? (i.e. How did you synchronize them?)
All of the questions are in the same vain, if we can agree that clocks work in the devices they are used in. Then we can move on. These are not trick question they only asked to set a firm foundation on what is acceptable going forward.
Well, that's just precisely the entire point. There is no such firm foundation when it comes to clocks because of the way motion effects how fast they tick. It isn't a question of whether the clocks work, it's a question of being able to tell wether they are in sync with each other.
* The fallacy of Begging the Question occurs when an argument's premises assume the truth of the conclusion, instead of supporting it.